Thanks Kev, coming from you that is nice complement given it is using Slick (love the particle engine). Btw I was going to post this in the Slick forum as well but can't seem to log in, is there some issue at the moment?

In StarfeFighter, it's hard to actually shoot guys because you end up just zooming past each other all the time.

The Rally game is great, it looks and feels nice and the controls are good. You shouldn't call it Rally2D though, it looks like it's almost 3D! I think it's the way the car looks and the way the camera smoothly zooms in and out.

Cheers, now if I can just finish one. The combat in StrafeFighter will need some serious tweaking before it is fun, the AI at the moment is pretty basic and I think that is were I need to focus my energy. To avoid jousting style matches the enemy ships will have to do some rather tricky maneuvers to make sure your velocities don't diverge too much.As for the Rally game it took me a good while to tweak the driving to a level I was happy with. I really wanted a feeling of controlled speed which is hard in 2D because you can't see the track coming which is why the zooming/panning works the way it does. Rally2D is just a temporary name until I can come up with something a little more interesting/unique.

By the way if anyone is interested in how I did any of this stuff I have been thinking of trying my hand at writing an article. I was thinking either procedural generation (the planets/nebula in StrafeFighter) or creating art for the artistically inept (the ships / rally car).

By the way if anyone is interested in how I did any of this stuff I have been thinking of trying my hand at writing an article. I was thinking either procedural generation (the planets/nebula in StrafeFighter) or creating art for the artistically inept (the ships / rally car).

Both of these would be really useful. It's something we really don't have enough of in Java gaming, content and game specific type tutorials.

I have been writing a tutorial about the creation of TUER in French and I may translate it in English. Do you think it could interest anyone here?

It'd definitely be an interesting read. Everyone has to produce content for games so the other ones above in particular make a lot of sense. TUER might make sense an article, but tutorial wise I'm not sure how many other people would be trying to achieve a similar game as you are with TUER.

It'd definitely be an interesting read. Everyone has to produce content for games so the other ones above in particular make a lot of sense. TUER might make sense an article, but tutorial wise I'm not sure how many other people would be trying to achieve a similar game as you are with TUER.

Kev

We should encourage people to write 3D games in Java. If someone reuses my engine, he could write a "game" in some weeks if he understands the tutorial. Writing a map requires only a few minutes. Think about the credibility of Java gaming if people writes only 2D games

We should encourage people to write 3D games in Java. If someone reuses my engine, he could write a "game" in some weeks if he understands the tutorial. Writing a map requires only a few minutes. Think about the credibility of Java gaming if people writes only 2D games

No, I totally disagree (and frankly this attitude is getting really annoying). What we should focus on is encouraging people (and providing them the tools) to write fun, innovative and most importantly polished games with whatever rendering approach suits what they're doing. The most important thing, if the goal is to increase the credibility of Java for games development, is seeing polished modern looking completed games coming out (see Milpa for instance. The number of development sites I've seen Pulp and Milpa raises the profile of java game development more than any 3D tech demo of the latest over hyped GL feature).

To be brutally honest, I don't think that TUER looking like a average software ray casting engine from the 1990s but actually using GL underneath is really a good advert for java for games development. More over I see it as unlikely that many people would want to use it as a basis for a new FPS given there are more complete and modern looking options like Jake2 and Agency9's Megacorps.

I'm not sure what your personal objectives (I assume skill improvement and personal growth) but please don't try and push personal likes and dislikes as an approach to making java more viable for games development. The commercial game development world has recently woken up and realised quite how important casual, web and specifically 2D game play games are to the future of the industry, isn't it about time you did?

Kev

PS. And for interest I've developed complete and modern 2D and 3D games (both commercially) in Java, before you start trying to throw the technical competence nonsense around that you did on the AnalogKid's thread. I'm more than able to develop 3D games (especially with the great tools we're provided in Java), I simply find 2D a more expressive rendering approach than generic souless 3D models.

Totally agree, we should be encoraging good games regardless of 2d or 3d. It's not the nineties any more where people are impressed by bad 3d - good, polished games are where it's at.

sws26 : Really fun. The handling is spot on, and the track is quite interesting too. It's a bit big to learn the course though, perhaps multiple shorter courses rather than one big one might be an idea?

I disagree IMHO a rallying game lives from the long courses. But I miss co-pilot hints showing the distance and difficulty of the next curve. Simple icons before some of the more dangerous curves would be helpfull.

Yeah, really wanted to get the driving feeling right before starting on anything else. Assuming I don't start another game I will look at adding obstacles, pace-notes and engine noise in the next release. In a rally there are no laps and no learning every corner of the course. As cylab said you rely on pace-notes from your copilot so those will be pretty important.

Re track: How about just zooming out a bit more so that you can see ahead enough (maybe even let user decide zoom level) and possibly a minimap. Notes would naturally be cool as well. Maybe varying width of the road? I love the feel of driving just a bit faster than what you can handle. Obstacles would also enhance that feeling

No, I totally disagree (and frankly this attitude is getting really annoying). What we should focus on is encouraging people (and providing them the tools) to write fun, innovative and most importantly polished games with whatever rendering approach suits what they're doing. The most important thing, if the goal is to increase the credibility of Java for games development, is seeing polished modern looking completed games coming out (see Milpa for instance. The number of development sites I've seen Pulp and Milpa raises the profile of java game development more than any 3D tech demo of the latest over hyped GL feature).

To be brutally honest, I don't think that TUER looking like a average software ray casting engine from the 1990s but actually using GL underneath is really a good advert for java for games development. More over I see it as unlikely that many people would want to use it as a basis for a new FPS given there are more complete and modern looking options like Jake2 and Agency9's Megacorps.

I'm not sure what your personal objectives (I assume skill improvement and personal growth) but please don't try and push personal likes and dislikes as an approach to making java more viable for games development. The commercial game development world has recently woken up and realised quite how important casual, web and specifically 2D game play games are to the future of the industry, isn't it about time you did?

Kev

PS. And for interest I've developed complete and modern 2D and 3D games (both commercially) in Java, before you start trying to throw the technical competence nonsense around that you did on the AnalogKid's thread. I'm more than able to develop 3D games (especially with the great tools we're provided in Java), I simply find 2D a more expressive rendering approach than generic souless 3D models.

Sorry for borrowing your thread to speak about that too.

I don't push my personal likes and dislikes as an approach to make Java more viable for games development but I accuse many people here to overestimate the interest of 2D gaming for users and I find this attitude particularly annoying! Yes, more complete true games (even in 2D) can be more interesting than a 3D tech demo, I don't deny it, but a near-commercial quality games like Jake 2 improve the credibility of the use of Java for gaming more than a Tetris clone in 2D. Of course, I encourage people to use Jake 2 rather than TUER as a base for a new FPS as Jake 2 is more complete and widely better. TUER is not stable enough (it is ugly enough to receive your critics) and not complete enough, that's why I prefer waiting for some months before developing a plug-in for "Art Of Illusion" to use it as a base of a FPS creator.

On the other hand, I totally disagree with kevglass, 2D games aren't the future of the industry on my view. GTA 4 is not in 2D as far as I know if you want to talk about commercial games.

Finally, I don't say that 2D Java games are not interesting and I promote them when I write some articles on gaming websites, I don't promote only TUER, Tower Defence Game and Bloodridge, I promote Ultratron and many other 2D games too.

You do push your personal opinions, the "overestimate the interest of 2D gaming for users" is just that. You think they're not interesting to end users, so everyone must do right?

Quote

I totally disagree with kevglass, 2D games aren't the future of the industry on my view

And please don't misquote me. I said that the industry had realised how important casual, web and 2D were to the future, not that they were the future.

In short, I think you really need to stop posting complete drival about your world view and how we all should be fitting in to that. You could start a blog if you want to it, for instance I'm about to go post on mine.

You do push your personal opinions, the "overestimate the interest of 2D gaming for users" is just that. You think they're not interesting to end users, so everyone must do right?

And please don't misquote me. I said that the industry had realised how important casual, web and 2D were to the future, not that they were the future.

In short, I think you really need to stop posting complete drival about your world view and how we all should be fitting in to that. You could start a blog if you want to it, for instance I'm about to go post on mine.

Kev

Ok.... you're the only one to have the right to push your personal opinions here. You misunderstood what I wrote too, I don't think that 2D games are not interesting to end users but I think this interest is overestimated. Please stop your "drival" here too, it is easy to come here to give us lessons about what should be posted or not.

Aw, I was going to point out the misspelling of drivel. But, I was going to do it in an amusing fashion.

Because...

This topic is way off topic, and looking too much like a two-person argument. Could you guys either start a new thread for this discussion or keep it in PMs? And also, you two are some of the most active and respected people in this community and you're not exactly being civil with each other. Maybe chill out a bit?